The tits and tats of witnesses, this includes Hunter

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
32,415
Reaction score
3,537
Points
1,140
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
 

okfine

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2019
Messages
6,739
Reaction score
2,466
Points
210
Location
805
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Bring them all on, including Trump. He is the one at the "heart" of it all.
 

Hutch Starskey

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
23,501
Reaction score
3,206
Points
290
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
67,141
Reaction score
11,997
Points
2,030
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
 

Hutch Starskey

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
23,501
Reaction score
3,206
Points
290
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
What corruption?
 

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
85,457
Reaction score
10,921
Points
2,070
Location
Native America
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
What do the Bidens have to do with Trump's corruption and impeachment? Hint: NOTHING.

If calling the Bidens is what it takes to get real and relevant witnesses - so be it.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
67,141
Reaction score
11,997
Points
2,030
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
What corruption?
ugh have a good day
 

colfax_m

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
12,721
Reaction score
2,937
Points
150
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
67,141
Reaction score
11,997
Points
2,030
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?
I said it justifies his actions.
 

colfax_m

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
12,721
Reaction score
2,937
Points
150
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?
I said it justifies his actions.
It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?
 
OP
Slade3200

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
32,415
Reaction score
3,537
Points
1,140
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
Trump is accused of abusing power by asking Ukraine to investigate Biden for political purposes. If Biden was in fact doing something illegal then it is not political purposes anymore but becomes a matter of law enforcement. That make Hunter very relevant to the Reps and be sure it will be the case they will push.
 
OP
Slade3200

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
32,415
Reaction score
3,537
Points
1,140
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?
I said it justifies his actions.
It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?
you are correct, however there was an appearance of impropriety and if crimes get uncovered it’s going to be disastrous to the Dems case. Remember this isn’t a legal court, it is a political impeachment. I think it’s obvious that Trump did this for political purposes but it’s very hard to prove and with enough dirt
thrown at Hunter it is going to swallow up the point the Dems are trying to make. This impeachment is going to be a royal disaster. Both parties are pretty much beyond reproach at this point.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
67,141
Reaction score
11,997
Points
2,030
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?
I said it justifies his actions.
It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?
Thata different than what Trump was wanting investigated.
If there was corruption, it would justify his actions.
Good luck proving a negative.
 

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
62,904
Reaction score
17,639
Points
2,290
"What was the President wanting investigated? Something involving Hunter Biden? What was happening that needed investigating?"

Hunter Biden needs to testify as his scandal is at the center of Schiff's manufactured coup....

...and Hunter's testimony / scandal leads to Joe Biden & his videotaped confession of extorting the Ukraine PM...

....and Ukraine leads to Schiff...and his Ukraine & Burisma payments...and the Whistle Blower...and his new employee, the IC IG...


:p

.
 

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
62,904
Reaction score
17,639
Points
2,290
It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?
In this case Schiff is the dirty cop who made the stop and planted the bag of pot...


.
 

Hutch Starskey

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
23,501
Reaction score
3,206
Points
290
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
What corruption?
ugh have a good day
You're unable to explain your point?
 
OP
Slade3200

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
32,415
Reaction score
3,537
Points
1,140
"What was the President wanting investigated? Something involving Hunter Biden? What was happening that needed investigating?"

Hunter Biden needs to testify as his scandal is at the center of Schiff's manufactured coup....

...and Hunter's testimony / scandal leads to Joe Biden & his videotaped confession of extorting the Ukraine PM...

....and Ukraine leads to Schiff...and his Ukraine & Burisma payments...and the Whistle Blower...and his new employee, the IC IG...


:p

.
objectivity test... if you’re going to call Schiffs actions a manufactured coup then you’d have to admit that Trumps accusations against Hunter are also a manufactured crime that he was using for political purposes, right?
 

Hutch Starskey

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
23,501
Reaction score
3,206
Points
290
Dems do realize that witnesses mean BOTH parties are calling witnesses right? Something like, Bolton for Biden, Mik for Whistleblower, etc.

I hear pundits saying that Biden won’t get called because he isn’t relevant to the charges but that argument makes no sense to me as he is at the heart of the accusations. Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated... it’s Trumps only significant argument!

can somebody make the case for me why they don’t think Hunter would get called?
Huh?

Biden has nothing to do with Trump's actions. There is nothing Biden could say that would shed any light on what Trump is accused of doing.
If the corruption was true, it woulf justify trumps actions.
Would it? How does that prove he wasn’t politically motivated?
I said it justifies his actions.
No it doesn't. Not in any way.
 

BlindBoo

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
32,972
Reaction score
3,860
Points
1,130
Showing Hunter as corrupt disproves the accusations that Trumps “favor” was politically motivated
Hunter has not been charged with a crime in the USA or in The Ukraine.
 

colfax_m

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
12,721
Reaction score
2,937
Points
150
It doesn’t. Let’s say a cop doesn’t like someone and he pulls him over for no reason. The cop finds a bag of pot in the back seat. Does that bag of pot justify the cop’s actions?
In this case Schiff is the dirty cop who made the stop and planted the bag of pot...
.
Schiff didn’t make Trump do anything. He did it all on his own.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top